I am really looking forward to this movie. Monica Bellucci is so hot that she disrupts the laws of physics, drawing planets and metors towards Earth and eventually destroying us all.

But I have a little issue with this: "Catholicism keeps its followers by instilling feelings of fear, suffering and a giant IOU to God"- you

I'm not even a practicing Catholic anymore....but this is a horrible generalization. You could argue the same thing of most Christian religions. The Roman Catholic church has made many mistakes, but compared to many christian fundies roaming about nowadays, it actually looks really progressive.

And all of the people that have issues with the anti-semitism in this movie are fucking retards who haven't even seen it yet. Hey guess what folks, the bible says that the jewish crowd clamoured for Barrabas' release and they wanted Jesus (a devout jew) on the cross. Mel Gibson isn't drawing attention to that fact, but hes not gonna change the fucking story for political correctness!! Fucking people these days.

I think

Posted by phduffy on Feb 23, 2004

that I don't like the title.

Why not just The Passion?
Or the Passion of Christ?

I was at a Catholic wedding this weekend, and we were told how marriages are full of suffering, which is great.

Also, the bible tells that Jews killed Christ not because it's a historical accuracy, but because at the time the bible was written (50-70 years after Christ's death) the Romans were much more popular than at the time of Christ, and were in power. So the gospels were written with a slant to offend the Jews, even though the Romans were the ones that killed Christ. Now, obviously this is a huge huge generalization, and it's much more complicated than that. And of course there's disagreement about even that. It's just important to keep in mind the context in which these things were written.

Yes...but

Posted by Miguel on Feb 23, 2004

That's not the issue here. The Bible is just a document, and one that's been changed and edited countless times to get to it's present version, no doubt to reflect the many prejudices and biases of those who had the power to change it. In my opinion it should never be viewed as historical FACT.

As an example, there is lots of discussion going on that Jesus was in fact the child of a Roman soldier who raped Mary, there was lots of evidence supporting this theory, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

But it is the source of Mel Gibson's film....in fact the Bible IS Mel Gibson's film. And he shouldn't change it or minimize certain aspects of it because it offends the sensibilities of people, and I stand by the fact that most of the people complaining haven't even seen it yet.

And it happened over two millenia ago....it's time to focus on something else.

Hmm...

Posted by phduffy on Feb 23, 2004

I guess.

But if he's presenting something that's anti semitic, and we know that the truth is that it's wrong, should he present it?

Also, apparently his film is much more graphic than the bible. Why is he allowed to edit and change that, but nothing else?

To be honest, I don't know enough about the issue, so I probably shouldn't say much more.

BONUS: Mary of Magdalen was not a prostitute, and it not called one in the bible. This was added after!

Okay, enough. I'm sorry. Maybe I should go read the Divinci Code.
:)

Bible Schmible

Posted by cosmicfish on Feb 24, 2004

It is a generalization, but from my experience not horribly inaccurate. I have no problem with Christianity but I do with the Christians (more specifically Roman Catholics) that I have come in contact with thoughout my life. Roughly 90% of them were condecending, self-righteous bitches who looked down their noses at me and my immidiate family because we didn't go to church every single Sunday. Probaly half of these people were relatives. I found out a couple years ago that my Dad doesn't even belive in God but still kept up the pretense of faith for fear that we would be treated worse by the 'morally superior'. This is coming from a group that is supposed to love their neighbors and forgive and accept? I could alternativly chalk this up to little Formosa or the paternal side of my family, but look at all the wars that have been fought over religion.

Gah, I'm sorry... I'm a little bitter.

Certainly not all Christians are so hypocritical. It's just frustrating that something that is awesome and has a really positive, beautiful message can get twisted so much.

some possible answers

Posted by kris on Feb 24, 2004

phduffy - its called the "passion" because it refers to Christ's suffering. It's just another word that has been used to describe the events that lead up to Jesus' crucifiction. "The Christ" just refers to the name that Jesus was given. Jesus was never given the name "Christ" until after he died, and only by those who "founded" Christianity...... ans yes, The Da Vinci Code is a good book to read!

There are those who say that the Jews killed Jesus, and there are those who say that it was the Romans. One cannot really tell, because although the Bible indirectly tells of the Jews killing Jesus, there are books that were found in Nag Hammadi that tell otherwise. These books are the "lost gospels" of Jesus' life. In the Bible it states that "Pilate washed his hands of the situation", therefore leaving the decision up to the Jews, while the lost gospels state that "Pilate ordered the death of Jesus".

The graphic aspects of this film are more gory than what is stated in the Bible because research has been able to find historical facts on how crucifictions actually occurred in Jesus' time. They said that he was nailed to a cross. Well, all Gibson did was find out how. Most people beleive that Jesus was nailed through his hands, but this is impossible because his hands could not hold up the wieght of his body on an upright cross. He would have had to been nailed through his wrists. Furthermore, historians argue that it wasn't a real cross, that it was just a large piece of wood that was put accross two branches of a tree. Jesus' outstreched arms and torso on the tree trunk added the symbolism of the cross.

Right`

Posted by phduffy on Feb 24, 2004

Kris, I'm not talking about the crucifixtion.

I'm talking about the 30 hour of flogging and torture that happens before it, which is mentioned no where in the bible.

Okay, now I'm really goign to stop, you guys all know more about this than me.

hmmm

Posted by Miguel on Feb 24, 2004

Im not sure, but I'm sure that the bible does mention Christ being flogged before they put the crown of thorns on him.

Something about him being chained to a pillar? It has been a long time since I read the bible to my great grandma. But yes, there is definitely something there about flogging and general insults being thrown at Jesus by the Romans.

Curiosity satisfied

Posted by Miguel on Feb 24, 2004

John 19:1 (KJV)
Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged [him].

The other gospels mention some spitting and slapping, and hitting over the head with a reed. But here there is a scourging mentioned.

And as a final defense, Gibson took out this passage, the most controversial one in the Bible that fosters anti-semitism:

Matt 27:24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but [that] rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed [his] hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye [to it].

Mat 27:25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood [be] on us, and on our children

That last part there is nowhere to be found in Mel's movie.

aaaaaaugh!

Posted by Katie on Feb 24, 2004

You know what I hate?? I hate when Roman Catholic's get characterized as "condecending, self-righteous bitches who looked down their noses at me and my immidiate family because we didn't go to church every single Sunday". And the many many other derogatory terms that are used frequently.

Now, I can understand that people have had bad experiences with others and their religious views. But why always blame Catholics? I'm Catholic, or at least I was brought up that way. But my dad openly told us, from the time when we were very young, that he didn't believe in God, and so we went to church every week with our mum only. I never experienced any negativity from family or the community. I have also never seen any Catholic push their views on others, and my home town was very italian, and therefore very catholic. What I have experienced is my sister, who for a time was "Christian" although not part of the bible thumping crowd, tell me that I would be going to hell for various (perhaps obvious) reasons. And she informed the whole family that she believed my mother, who is Catholic and attends church regularly, would also be going to hell because she hadn't accepted Jesus Christ as her saviour.

So what I think is this: every religion has its hardcores. These people tend to stand out by making others feel bad for their lack of traditional religion in their lives. But it's EVERY religion that has these people, not just Roman Catholics.

Please, generalizing, even if you have had bad personal experiences, hurts. Don't do it.

Question

Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2004

If you offer glib service to a religion, are you really of that particular religion? Or just spiritual to some degree?

I've always thought that if you say you're of a particular religion, you kinda have to accept all it's tenets. If you ignore some, or don't believe others, what's the point of really claiming you're of that religion?

Isn't the point of all these various religions that each believes IT is right absolutely? That following it's doctrines is what's needed to really get into heaven? So if you don't follow EVERYTHING, what are you saying or really trying to do?

Answer?

Posted by nszyngie on Feb 24, 2004

I guess it depends on your interpretation of what it means to follow a religion. I think it is a fine line, whether you chose to say you a re of a certain religion in light of your decision to waive certain aspects of it. I mean, if you say your catholic, but don't think Jesus really died on the cross, that's one thing, because it is a core belief of the religion. However, if you do not practice the 10 commandments, or don't go to church every sunday, some would say, including myself, that there is tolerance in the religion, seeing as that is part of the message they try and convey.

If you follow the bible to a T, you're a bible thumper (please, no offence to anyone, I am trying an example here). If you don't foolow it exactly, and don't go to church every Sunday, I believe you can still consider yourself Catholic because the church teaches understanding, and sheparding those people back to God - which I believe is why older folks generaklly turn back to some form of religion when they age, because they want to make amends with God and make sure they are taken care of and not forgotten in the afterlife.

I don't know. It is tricky. I guess I am trying to make a point about what it is believe . . .

All in One

Posted by nszyngie on Feb 24, 2004

I also believe that all religions of the world worship and recognize the same God. Christianity, Muslim and Islamic religions all have some consistent characters. I simply think that various forms and types of worship have evolved over the years, but from common ground. Fear and awe of the world around us and our misunderstanding of how it functions. Anyways, think about it: how can there be more than one Supreme Being? It's got to be the same person!

Church & Sundays

Posted by Nerhael on Feb 24, 2004

Does the bible or whatever religious text really make reference to worshipping every sunday indoors by a priest? Or is that more of a human contruct?

meh...

Posted by alltogethernow on Feb 24, 2004

when it comes to religion my policy has always been of the 'live and let live' variety...

even if i can't understand or accept someone's religion..
i can at least RE-spect it... (unless they get preachy.. then i get nasty)

the only thing that really annoys me is when someone claims to be of a certain religion but doesn't really know anything about it....
i find this happens all the time, especially with Christian religions...
all the Muslims and Buddists i know are pretty firm in their beliefs and know the basic ethos and more complex ideals behind their religion...
most Christians i know don't know the Bible... well at least they don't know it as well as they should...

cripes! i remember a time i was speaking to Jessica and Laura and they didn't know who Delilah was....
although neither of them claim to be practicing Christians they both went to a Catholic high school... shouldn't they teach the basic stories of the Bible in Catholic school??

perhaps someone can enlighten me on this one...

I myself have read the Bible almost cover to cover.. and retain a surprising amount of knowledge from it... i would love to read the Qur'an or the Talmud but i hear it just isn't the same unless you know arabic/hebrew respectively...

As for myself i'm agnostic on a good day..
so my spiritual beliefs are basically non-existant...

just my 2 cents

construct

Posted by nszyngie on Feb 24, 2004

I would think that it is the act of worship. Sunday being the 'day of rest' and all. I highly doubt the bible makes mention of this, but it most certains tries to relay the message that God should be worshipped.
I am guessing Sunday inside a church/temple is a gathering place for members to congregate and give worship, together.

Just a thought. But again, if you do that in the privacy fo your home or workplace, I would think that would be as good, right?

oh oh just thought of something

Posted by alltogethernow on Feb 24, 2004

worshipping at home is great..
cept that you are supposed to give the church like 20% of your income...

wtf? he wants Congress to change the Consitution so that same-sex marriages will no longer be allowed. Holy crap.

catholic schools...

Posted by kris on Feb 24, 2004

I went to a catholic school my whole life. I took religion classes for 13 years, they never told us about Sampson and Delilah, those kind of stories were taught in Sunday School. The things that we learned in High School and greade school were the prayers (Apostles Creed, Hail Mary, Our Father, etc), the sacraments (baptism, communion, reconciliation, confirmation, marriage,priesthood, and final rights before death), how to read the Bible ( New and Old Testaments, Chapter, Verse), Parables, and religious holidays....

Tithing: giving 10% of annual income to the church.....
Keep Holy the Sabbath Day: Taken from the 10 commandments, alos followed by the Jews. Sunday was declared the Christian day of rest, while Friday (or is it Saturday) is regarded as the Jewish day of rest. Either way, days of the week did not exist back then as they do now. They were man made.
I don't think it matters whether you worship in a church or at home. The church is just a building made up to house a community of people that believe the same thing, there is nothing that says that christians have to worship on sunday in a big building....

hee hee!

Posted by mike on Feb 24, 2004

Religion amuses me. A great deal. I have no intention of going on about what I believe, but I have some input.

Katie: Give your sister a good dose of religion right back: "Judge not lest ye be judged.". I think that's jammed in the bible somewhere. Then make up some reason why she is going to hell. If everyone sins sometime, you can't be alive without doing something wrong. The Pope says birth control is evil right?

All of the religions that believe in God, and are based off the Bible seem kind of crazy to me. They are taking a book which is VERY old and has been translated and modified soooo many times over the years that who knows what it origionally said, and they are beliving in it soooo much that they would die for it in extreme cases. Different sects like muslims and catholics and christians and jews have fought wars over very specific interpretations of the same stories! I just don't get it. I kind of understand how some different religions believe or condemn the new testament and think of Jesus in different ways or not at all, but I just don't see why they can't all agree that the basci concept is the same.

I always liked to think of religion as a basic guideline for what is and isn't the proper way to conduct yourself. Don't murder, steal, have sex with your neighbors wife, etc., that all makes good sense. Pretty much all religions that I have heard of believe in those same principals. Giving 10% makes little sense, dividing entire countries, warring, and the death and destruction that come about over interpretations of horribly old stories (yeah, I think they are just well written stories with good morals etc.) makes no sense.

I don't get how it is possible to believe in both the Bible and in evolution. It doesn't make any sense, there is just too much conflict for me to understand how that works.

As far as I can tell religion is just an explanation of that which we do not understand (or did not understand in some cases). Religion usually explains how the world was created, how you should live your life (a set of guidelines), and what happens when you die (usually dependent on how well you followed the previously mentioned guidelines for living your life).

People have believed in things since.. uh.. a long time ago. The Greeks believed in thier "heathen" Gods, the Romans essentially copied the Greeks. Natives believed in a bunch of gods, Africans had various religions, there wast the Aztecs... suffice it to say that the list is endless. I just don't get what makes people so sure that what they believe in is correct. We have a handful of religions which started as cults and caught on way back in the day, and before that there were other religions that started as cults. And hey, we have cults now days too, who is to say that they will not be the religions of the future?

... that's enough. To each their own.

cartoon.

Posted by mike on Feb 24, 2004

I can't remember which cartoon I was watching, but it had representatives from a bunch of religions standing in front of St. Peter at the gates to heaven.

One of the people from some religion said "I am from (such and such a religion) so I get into heaven right?"

St. Peter says back in a real game showish manner "No... sorry... the correct answer was Mormon. ... Mormon."

I couldn't stop laughing, that is how I feel about religion.

Oh crap.

Posted by mike on Feb 24, 2004

Please noone kill me.

lol

Posted by nszyngie on Feb 24, 2004

that sounds like family guy. no one else would even try that . . . good work. i had it read in a monty python voice - that would have worked too!

...

Posted by cosmicfish on Feb 24, 2004

Sorry Katie, you are right, I shouldn't generalize. It is terrible.

I really have to learn to let go of my anger in this department.

It's true

Posted by phduffy on Feb 25, 2004

cosmicfish, you're right. Generalizing is bad.

In fact, all people who generalize are assholes.

perhaps...

Posted by Hatful on May 08, 2004

The Passion of Christ... the movie..
humm..

Well i think that it might be important to note that basing a movie solely on the Bible is much like basing a movie solely on, say, Alice in Wonderland. Both are fanciful works of fiction, the difference being that one was written by very many people while the other written by one person.

Though perhaps historians/archeologists/etc.. have been able to prove anything said in the bible? I am not really sure.. Does anyone know? I have often wondered if there was any actual evidence of any kind that suggests that the Bible is anything more than bollucks.

Beyond that.. some food for thought...

"Where has God gone?" he cried. "I shall tell you. We have killed him - you and I. We are his murderers. [...] deeds require time even after they are done, before they can be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than the distant stars - and yet they have done it themselves."
- Th Gay Science (aka Joyous Wisdom), Nietzsche